DOCSLIB.ORG

PRE Evaluation Report for Rhaphiolepis Indica Var. Umbellata

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

PRE Evaluation Report -- Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata Plant Risk Evaluator -- PRE™ Evaluation Report Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata -- Texas 2017 Farm Bill PRE Project PRE Score: 6 -- Accept (low risk of invasiveness) Confidence: 63 / 100 Questions answered: 18 of 20 -- Valid (80% or more questions answered) Privacy: Public Status: Submitted Evaluation Date: September 30, 2017 This PDF was created on August 13, 2018 Page 1/17 PRE Evaluation Report -- Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata Plant Evaluated Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata Image by KENPEI, Wikipedia user Page 2/17 PRE Evaluation Report -- Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata Evaluation Overview A PRE™ screener conducted a literature review for this plant (Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata) in an effort to understand the invasive history, reproductive strategies, and the impact, if any, on the region's native plants and animals. This research reflects the data available at the time this evaluation was conducted. Summary Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata is naturalized in one county in southern Alabama. The record for this occurence could not be located, and it is unclear how extensively the species has naturalized. It is noted as invasive in parts of the Norfolk Islands, Australia, and New Zealand but the impact on native plant communities is not clear. General Information Status: Submitted Screener: Kim Taylor Evaluation Date: September 30, 2017 Plant Information Plant: Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata If the plant is a cultivar, how does its behavior differs from its parent's? This evaluation is for the species, not a particular cultivar. Regional Information Region Name: Texas Page 3/17 PRE Evaluation Report -- Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata Climate Matching Map To answer four of the PRE questions for a regional evaluation, a climate map with three climate data layers (Precipitation, UN EcoZones, and Plant Hardiness) is needed. These maps were built using a toolkit created in collaboration with GreenInfo Network, USDA, PlantRight, California-Invasive Plant Council, and The Information Center for the Environment at UC Davis. Click here to see the generated climate matching map for this region. This climate match database is hosted by GreenInfo Network and publicly accessible. Page 4/17 PRE Evaluation Report -- Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata Evaluation Questions These questions are based in an original article published at the University of California, Davis, and can be found on the PLOS One website, here: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121053 Invasive History and Climate Matching (Questions 1 - 6) 1. Has the species (or cultivar or variety, if applicable; applies to subsequent "species" questions) become naturalized where it is not native? Answer: Yes, which contributes 1 points to the total PRE score. The screener has a High confidence in this answer based on the available literature. Answer / Justification: Kartesz indicates Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata is naturalized in one county in Alabama. The source of this record could not be found. Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk indicates the species is naturalized and invasive in the Norfolk Islands, Australia, and New Zealand. Reference(s): Kartesz, J. T. (2015). The Biota of North America Program (BONAP). Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk (PIER) (0). Rhaphiolepis umbellata (PIER species info). 2. Is the species (or cultivar or variety) noted as being naturalized in the US or world in a similar climate? Answer: No, which contributes 0 points to the total PRE score. The screener has a Low confidence in this answer based on the available literature. Answer / Justification: Kartesz indicates Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata is naturalized in one county in Alabama. The source of this record could not be found. Page 5/17 PRE Evaluation Report -- Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata Reference(s): Kartesz, J. T. (2015). The Biota of North America Program (BONAP). 3. Is the species (or cultivar or variety) noted as being invasive in the U.S. or world? Answer: Yes, which contributes 2 points to the total PRE score. The screener has a High confidence in this answer based on the available literature. Answer / Justification: The Global Compendium of Weeds identifies the species as "environmental weed, naturalised, sleeper weed, weed". Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk indicates the species is invasive in the Norfolk Islands, Australia, and New Zealand. Reference(s): Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk (PIER) (0). Rhaphiolepis umbellata (PIER species info). Global Compendium of Weeds (GCW) (0). Rhaphiolepis umbellata information from the Global Compendium of Weeds (GCW). 4. Is the species (or cultivar or variety) noted as being invasive in the US or world in a similar climate? Answer: No, which contributes 0 points to the total PRE score. The screener has a Low confidence in this answer based on the available literature. Answer / Justification: Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk indicates the species is invasive in the Norfolk Islands, Australia, and New Zealand. Portions of Australia and New Zealand share a similar climate to Texas, but I could not locate where the species was growing within these areas. Page 6/17 PRE Evaluation Report -- Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata Reference(s): Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk (PIER) (0). Rhaphiolepis umbellata (PIER species info). 5. Are other species of the same genus (or closely related genera) invasive in a similar climate? Answer: No, which contributes 0 points to the total PRE score. The screener has a Medium confidence in this answer based on the available literature. Answer / Justification: No other members of the genus are naturalized in the U.S. or listed in the Global Compendium of Weeds. Reference(s): Global Compendium of Weeds (0). Global Compendium of Weeds: species index. Kartesz, J. T. (2015). The Biota of North America Program (BONAP). 6. Is the species (or cultivar or variety) found predominately in a climate matching the region of concern? Answer: No, which contributes 0 points to the total PRE score. The screener has a High confidence in this answer based on the available literature. Answer / Justification: Less than half of the species range has a similar climate to Texas. Reference(s): GBIF (0). Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata (Thunb. ex Murray) H. Ohashi. Page 7/17 PRE Evaluation Report -- Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata Impact on Native Plants and Animals (Questions 7 - 10) 7. Does this plant displace native plants and dominate (overtop or smother) the plant community in areas where it has established? Answer: No, which contributes 0 points to the total PRE score. The screener has a Medium confidence in this answer based on the available literature. Answer / Justification: There are no reports of R. indica var. umbellata overtopping and smothering native plant communities. Reference(s): [Anonymous] . 8. Is the plant noted as promoting fire and/or changing fire regimes? Answer: No, which contributes 0 points to the total PRE score. The screener has a Low confidence in this answer based on the available literature. Answer / Justification: There is no evidence of this. Reference(s): [Anonymous] . 9. Is the plant a health risk to humans or animals/fish? Has the species been noted as impacting grazing systems? Answer: No, which contributes 0 points to the total PRE score. The screener has a High confidence in this answer based on the available literature. Page 8/17 PRE Evaluation Report -- Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata Answer / Justification: The species is not known to be toxic. Reference(s): Plants For A Future (PFAF) (0). Rhaphiolepis umbellata Japanese Hawthorn PFAF Plant Database. 10. Does the plant produce impenetrable thickets, blocking or slowing movement of animals, livestock, or humans? Answer: No, which contributes 0 points to the total PRE score. The screener has a High confidence in this answer based on the available literature. Answer / Justification: It does not form thickets. Reference(s): Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk (PIER) (0). Rhaphiolepis umbellata (PIER species info). Reproductive Strategies (Questions 11 - 17) 11. Does this species (or cultivar or variety) reproduce and spread vegetatively? Answer: No, which contributes 0 points to the total PRE score. The screener has a High confidence in this answer based on the available literature. Answer / Justification: The species does not spread vegetatively. Page 9/17 PRE Evaluation Report -- Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata Reference(s): Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk (PIER) (0). Rhaphiolepis umbellata (PIER species info). 12. If naturally detached fragments from this plant are capable of producing new plants, is this a common method of reproduction for the plant? Answer: No, which contributes 0 points to the total PRE score. The screener has a High confidence in this answer based on the available literature. Answer / Justification: There is no evidence of this. Reference(s): Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk (PIER) (0). Rhaphiolepis umbellata (PIER species info). 13. Does the species (or cultivar or variety) commonly produce viable seed? Answer: Yes, which contributes 1 points to the total PRE score. The screener has a High confidence in this answer based on the available literature. Answer / Justification: Propagation is by seed. Reference(s): Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk (PIER) (0). Rhaphiolepis umbellata (PIER species info). Page 10/17 PRE Evaluation Report -- Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata 14. Does this plant produce copious viable
Recommended publications
  • SALT TOLERANT PLANTS Recommended for Pender County Landscapes

    SALT TOLERANT PLANTS Recommended for Pender County Landscapes

    North Carolina Cooperative Extension NC STATE UNIVERSITY SALT TOLERANT PLANTS Recommended for Pender County Landscapes Pender County Cooperative Extension Urban Horticulture Leaflet 14 Coastal Challenges Plants growing at the beach are subjected to environmental conditions much different than those planted further inland. Factors such as blowing sand, poor soils, high temperatures, and excessive drainage all influence how well plants perform in coastal landscapes, though the most significant effect on growth is salt spray. Most plants will not tolerate salt accumulating on their foliage, making plant selection for beachfront land- scapes particularly challenging. Salt Spray Salt spray is created when waves break on the beach, throwing tiny droplets of salty water into the air. On-shore breezes blow this salt laden air landward where it comes in contact with plant foliage. The amount of salt spray plants receive varies depending on their proximity to the beachfront, creating different vegetation zones as one gets further away from the beachfront. The most salt-tolerant species surviving in the frontal dune area. As distance away from the ocean increases, the level of salt spray decreases, allowing plants with less salt tolerance to survive. Natural Protection The impact of salt spray on plants can be lessened by physically blocking salt laden winds. This occurs naturally in the maritime forest, where beachfront plants protect landward species by creating a layer of foliage that blocks salt spray. It is easy to see this effect on the ocean side of maritime forest plants, which are “sheared” by salt spray, causing them to grow at a slant away from the oceanfront.
  • UCLPIT Final Report 2017-2019

    UCLPIT Final Report 2017-2019

    TM UC Landscape Plant Irrigation Trials 2017-2019 Trial Results Investigators: Jared A. Sisneroz Staff Research Associate II UC Davis Dept. of Plant Sciences [email protected] Karrie Reid UCCE Advisor San Joaquin County UCCE [email protected] Loren Oki UCCE Specialist UC Davis Dept. of Plant Sciences [email protected] Darren Haver UCCE Specialist Orange County UCCE [email protected] Outreach Coordinator: Dave Fujino Executive Director California Center for Urban Horticulture [email protected] Table of Contents Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………3 Results Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….4 Methods ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 Outreach ....................................................................................................................................................... 6 Results & Discussion ..................................................................................................................................... 9 Appendix A .................................................................................................................................................. 23 Appendix B .................................................................................................................................................. 82 Acknowledgments We would like to thank Shirley Alvarez, Cheryl Gartner, Bridget Giffei, Danielle
  • In Our Coastal Gardens

    In Our Coastal Gardens

    Detailed lists are available by pole beans, arugula, butter beans, Sept. MAY a slow-release nitrogen fertilizer. month at: https://txmg.org/aran- and herbs thru March. Transplant v Wildflowers/Annuals – do not Water with a very slow dripping sas/publications-other-resourc- warm season plants - tomato, mow wildflowers. Let them v Upkeep – check mulch levels, hose 1x/wk several hours - pepper, and eggplant. Protect replenish to 3-4” deep to deter dependent on how hot, dry, or es/news-column-archives/ bloom and go to seed so they warm weather crops from cold. come back next year. weeds, protect from heat, and windy. JANUARY v Fruit Trees – transplant new hold moisture. Keep mulch v Roses – Fertilize 1x/mo through varieties. Prune existing trees APRIL 2-3” away from trunk or stem. Sept. then water deeply. v Upkeep – cold spell predicted? = before they bloom and set fruit. Watch for spider mites, aphids, Deadheading after first spring water. Freeze? = cover plants until v Upkeep – fertilize all plants Remember, the branches you scale, beetles, whiteflies, and blossoms encourages blooming. temp is above freezing. Do not with compost, worm castings, trim won’t give you any fruit this powdery mildew. Check tender Watch for black spot, remove and fertilize until you see new growth or slow release fertilizer 1x/mo year, so don’t go crazy. growth. Many insects can be - and then, only lightly. Remove through summer, and mulch. Pull destroy diseased leaves. Prune washed off with a strong spray of problem and invasive species. v Roses – plant - well-drained weeds. Check for mildew, rust, climbing roses when they finish soil w/ 8 hrs of sun; fertilize.
  • Rhaphiolepis Umbellata.Pdf

    Rhaphiolepis Umbellata.Pdf

    Family: Rosaceae Taxon: Rhaphiolepis umbellata Synonym: Laurus umbellata Thunb, (basionym0 Common Name: Japanese hawthorn Rhaphiolepis japonica Seibold & Zucc. yedda hawthorn Questionaire : current 20090513 Assessor: Patti Clifford Designation: L Status: Assessor Approved Data Entry Person: Patti Clifford WRA Score 0 101 Is the species highly domesticated? y=-3, n=0 n 102 Has the species become naturalized where grown? y=1, n=-1 103 Does the species have weedy races? y=1, n=-1 201 Species suited to tropical or subtropical climate(s) - If island is primarily wet habitat, then (0-low; 1-intermediate; 2- Low substitute "wet tropical" for "tropical or subtropical" high) (See Appendix 2) 202 Quality of climate match data (0-low; 1-intermediate; 2- Intermediate high) (See Appendix 2) 203 Broad climate suitability (environmental versatility) y=1, n=0 n 204 Native or naturalized in regions with tropical or subtropical climates y=1, n=0 n 205 Does the species have a history of repeated introductions outside its natural range? y=-2, ?=-1, n=0 n 301 Naturalized beyond native range y = 1*multiplier (see n Appendix 2), n= question 205 302 Garden/amenity/disturbance weed n=0, y = 1*multiplier (see y Appendix 2) 303 Agricultural/forestry/horticultural weed n=0, y = 2*multiplier (see n Appendix 2) 304 Environmental weed n=0, y = 2*multiplier (see n Appendix 2) 305 Congeneric weed n=0, y = 1*multiplier (see n Appendix 2) 401 Produces spines, thorns or burrs y=1, n=0 n 402 Allelopathic y=1, n=0 403 Parasitic y=1, n=0 n 404 Unpalatable to grazing animals
  • Atoll Research Bulletin No. 503 the Vascular Plants Of

    Atoll Research Bulletin No. 503 the Vascular Plants Of

    ATOLL RESEARCH BULLETIN NO. 503 THE VASCULAR PLANTS OF MAJURO ATOLL, REPUBLIC OF THE MARSHALL ISLANDS BY NANCY VANDER VELDE ISSUED BY NATIONAL MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION WASHINGTON, D.C., U.S.A. AUGUST 2003 Uliga Figure 1. Majuro Atoll THE VASCULAR PLANTS OF MAJURO ATOLL, REPUBLIC OF THE MARSHALL ISLANDS ABSTRACT Majuro Atoll has been a center of activity for the Marshall Islands since 1944 and is now the major population center and port of entry for the country. Previous to the accompanying study, no thorough documentation has been made of the vascular plants of Majuro Atoll. There were only reports that were either part of much larger discussions on the entire Micronesian region or the Marshall Islands as a whole, and were of a very limited scope. Previous reports by Fosberg, Sachet & Oliver (1979, 1982, 1987) presented only 115 vascular plants on Majuro Atoll. In this study, 563 vascular plants have been recorded on Majuro. INTRODUCTION The accompanying report presents a complete flora of Majuro Atoll, which has never been done before. It includes a listing of all species, notation as to origin (i.e. indigenous, aboriginal introduction, recent introduction), as well as the original range of each. The major synonyms are also listed. For almost all, English common names are presented. Marshallese names are given, where these were found, and spelled according to the current spelling system, aside from limitations in diacritic markings. A brief notation of location is given for many of the species. The entire list of 563 plants is provided to give the people a means of gaining a better understanding of the nature of the plants of Majuro Atoll.
  • Forest Structures, Composition, and Distribution on a Pacific Island, with Reference to Ecological Release and Speciation!

    Forest Structures, Composition, and Distribution on a Pacific Island, with Reference to Ecological Release and Speciation!

    Pacific Science (1991), vol. 45, no. 1: 28-49 © 1991 by University of Hawaii Press. All rights reserved Forest Structures, Composition, and Distribution on a Pacific Island, with Reference to Ecological Release and Speciation! YOSHIKAZU SHIMIZU2 AND HIDEO TABATA 3 ABSTRACT: Native forest and scrub of Chichijima, the largest island in the Bonins, were classified into five types based on structural features: Elaeocarpus­ Ardisia mesic forest, 13-16 m high, dominated by Elaeocarpus photiniaefolius and Ardisia sieboldii; Pinus-Schima mesic forest, 12-16 m high, consisting of Schima mertensiana and an introduced pine , Pinus lutchuensis; Rhaphiolepis­ Livistonia dry forest, 2-6 m high, mainly occupied by Rhaphiolepis indica v. integerrima; Distylium-Schima dry forest, 3-8 m high, dominated by Distylium lepidotum and Schima mertensiana; and Distylium-Pouteria dry scrub, 0.3­ 1.5 m high, mainly composed of Distylium lepidotum. A vegetation map based on this classification was developed. Species composition and structural features of each type were analyzed in terms of habitat condition and mechanisms of regeneration. A group of species such as Pouteria obovata, Syzgygium buxifo­ lium, Hibiscus glaber, Rhaphiolepis indica v. integerrima, and Pandanus boninen­ sis, all with different growth forms from large trees to stunted shrubs, was subdominant in all vegetation types. Schima mertensiana , an endemic pioneer tree, occurred in both secondary forests and climax forests as a dominant canopy species and may be an indication of "ecological release," a characteristic of oceanic islands with poor floras and little competitive pressure. Some taxonomic groups (Callicarpa, Symplocos, Pittosporum, etc.) have speciated in the under­ story of Distylium-Schima dry forest and Distylium-Pouteria dry scrub.
  • Desirable Plant List

    Desirable Plant List

    Carpinteria-Summerland Fire Protection District High Fire Hazard Area Desirable Plant List Desirable Qualities for Landscape Plants within Carpinteria/Summerland High Fire Hazard areas • Ability to store water in leaves or • Ability to withstand drought. stems. • Prostrate or prone in form. • Produces limited dead and fine • Ability to withstand severe pruning. material. • Low levels of volatile oils or resins. • Extensive root systems for controlling erosion. • Ability to resprout after a fire. • High levels of salt or other compounds within its issues that can contribute to fire resistance. PLANT LIST LEGEND Geographical Area ......... ............. Water Needs..... ............. Evergreen/Deciduous C-Coastal ............. ............. H-High . ............. ............. E-Evergreen IV-Interior Valley ............. ............. M-Moderate....... ............. D-Deciduous D-Deserts ............. ............. L-Low... ............. ............. E/D-Partly or ............. ............. VL -Very Low .... ............. Summer Deciduous Comment Code 1 Not for use in coastal areas......... ............ 13 ........ Tends to be short lived. 2 Should not be used on steep slopes........ 14 ........ High fire resistance. 3 May be damaged by frost. .......... ............ 15 ........ Dead fronds or leaves need to be 4 Should be thinned bi-annually to ............ ............. removed to maintain fire safety. remove dead or unwanted growth. .......... 16 ........ Tolerant of heavy pruning. 5 Good for erosion control. ............. ...........
  • Plant and Landscape Guide Rancho Santa Fe, California, Is Considered to Be in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Because of Its Unique Characteristics

    Plant and Landscape Guide Rancho Santa Fe, California, Is Considered to Be in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Because of Its Unique Characteristics

    Plant and Landscape Guide Rancho Santa Fe, California, is considered to be in a very high fire hazard severity zone because of its unique characteristics. It is considered a Wildland Urban Interface area because of the proximity of the natural chaparral vegetation to developed areas, often immediately abutting structures. Additionally, warm coastal weather, Santa Ana winds, mountainous terrain, and steep slopes contribute to the very high fire hazard severity zone designation. DistrictIn an effort (RSFFPD) to protect does homes not allow from certain a future types devastating of trees, Wildlandplants, or fire shrubs such to as be the ones experienced in 2003 and 2007, the Rancho Santa Fe Fire Protection planted within certain distances of structures. This booklet contains valuable educateinformation the publicpertaining on RSFFPD’s to both desirable ordinances and regarding undesirable landscaping trees, shrubs, so they can ground covers, vines, roadway clearances, and palm trees. The goal is to Lady Bank’s Rose increase the the chances of their home surviving a wildfire. Please feel free to contactPlease Note: the Fire District if you have any questions, comments, or concerns. 1. THIS IS NOT A COMPREHENSIVE LIST. This booklet is intended to simply guide the public on what types of trees and shrubs are acceptable within the Fire District. Other trees and shrubs not listed 2. may also be acceptable upon approval by the RSFFPD. Trees listed as requiring 30-foot spacing from the drip line to the structure are considered non-fire resistive trees by the RSFFPD. Consult a design professional or the Fire District for site-specific 3.
  • Vascular Plants of Virginia Lake Reserve, St John's Hill, Wanganui

    Vascular Plants of Virginia Lake Reserve, St John's Hill, Wanganui

    Vascular Plants of Virginia Lake Reserve, St John’s Hill, Wanganui Wanganui Plant List No. 99 (incorporating Wanganui Plant List No. 78: wetland plants of Virginia Lake) Compiled by Colin Ogle Department of Conservation, Wanganui With assistance of members of Wanganui Botanical Group, and extra identifications by C Ecroyd (FRI Rotorua); E Cameron and R Gardner (Auckland Museum); P Simpson (Lincoln) Last updated 19 Dec 2000 For exotic species, * denotes planted specimens and ** denotes species that are self- establishing, including weeds and species spreading from planted specimens. For NZ indigenous species, “a” denotes species presumed to be natural to the reserve; “b” denotes planted specimens, and “c” denotes planted specimens that are now self- establishing. CHR,NZFRI, AK: specimens from Virginia Lake in herbaria at Landcare Research, Lincoln (CHR); Rotorua (NZFRI); Auckland Museum (AK) Trees and shrubs 1. Gymnosperms * Abies nordmanniana Caucasian fir b Agathis australis kauri * Araucaria araucana monkey puzzle * Araucaria heterophylla Norfolk pine * Callitris gracilis ssp. gracilis (NZFRI * Callitris rhomboidea (NZFRI Port Jackson pine, cypress pine * Cedrus atlantica ‘glauca’ Atlantic cedar * Cedrus sp. (?C. deodara/libaii) cedar * Chamaecyparis funebris (NZFRI 22551) * Chamaecyparis lawsoniana (NZFRI 22550) Lawson’s cypress * Cryptomeria japonica Japanese cedar * Cunninghamia lanceolata Chinese fir * Cupressus lusitanica (NZFRI) * Cupressus macrocarpa macrocarpa * Cupressus sempervirens (NZFRI 22546, 23208) Italian cypress b Dacrycarpus dacrydioides kahikatea b Dacrydium cupressinum rimu * Decussocarpus falcatus (= Afrocarpus falcata) (has bark like matai) (NZFRI 8391, 22437, 23301) * Gingko biloba gingko, maidenhair tree * Juniperus chinensis (NZFRI Chinese juniper * Juniperus communis ‘ ‘ juniper * Juniperus recurva (NZFRI * Juniperus squamata ‘Meyeri’ flaky juniper * Metasequoia glyptostroboides (NZFRI 22467) dawn redwood * Picea abies [ID conf.
  • ¹Associate Professor, Dept. of Plant Pathology and Physiology, VPI & SU, Blacksburg, VA 24061

    ¹Associate Professor, Dept. of Plant Pathology and Physiology, VPI & SU, Blacksburg, VA 24061

    Plant Pathology Circular No. 206 Dept. Agric. & Consumer Serv. November 1979 Division of Plant Industry ENTOMOSPORIUM LEAF SPOT OF PHOTINIA R. C. Lambe and W. H. Ridings Introduction. Photinia, a shrub in the family Rosaceae, is widely grown in nurseries in the southern United States. Several species, Photinia serrulata Lindl., P. glabra (Thunb.) Maxim., and a hybrid, P. X fraseri Dress are grown for landscaping. Photinia X fraseri, is especially desirable because of its bright red, immature foliage and is the most popular species grown. All of these ornamentals are susceptible to leaf spotting caused by the fungus Entomosporium maculatum Lev., which has the perfect stage Fabraea maculata (Lev.) Atk. (=Diplocarpon maculatum (Atk. Jorstad) (10)). Entomosporium leaf spot of Photinia was first reported in Louisiana in 1957 (6) and has since appeared in Florida (1) and Virginia. Other ornamentals reported to be hosts include Juneberry (Amelanchier spp.), flowering quince (Chaenomeles spp.), loquat (Eriobotrya japonica (Thunb.) Lindl.), firethorn (Pyracantha coccinea Roem. var. formosana), Indian hawthorn (Rhaphiolepis indica Lindl.), and mountain ash (Sorbus sitchensis Roem.) (1, 5, 7, 9). Symptoms. Leaf spots on Photinia are at first minute, slightly raised dots on either surface of the leaf. Older spots have a slightly depressed center with raised margins. On the juvenile red-colored foliage of P. X fraseri, the young minute leaf spots (more or less circular) are a darker red than the surrounding healthy tissue, whereas older necrotic spots (up to 3-4 mm in diameter) have ashen grey centers and dark-purple margins surrounded by an indefinite lighter purplish halo. The centers of the necrotic spots on both surfaces are dotted with minute black specks, covered by a hyaline membrane which are the spore structures (acervuli) of the fungus (Fig.
  • Tree Planting List

    Tree Planting List

    TREE PLANTING LIST Trees Acceptable for Planting Under / Near Overhead Power Lines (up to 12kV) (These trees may not be acceptable where hardware / lines sag or are low due to construction / terrain. This list not intended to be all-inclusive.) Phoenix roebelenii (Pigmy Date Palm) Punica granatum (Pomegranate) Tolerates heat-cold, FOLIAGE: Evergreen. Fronds medium-green 3’ long. drought HEIGHT: Slow growth 6’-12’. FOLIAGE: Deciduous. Leaves glossy green-bright yellow. FLOWER: inconspicuous. HEIGHT: Moderate growth to 20’. FRUIT: Dates, small jet-black. FLOWER: Varieties can be orange, pink, yellow, cream COMMENTS: Not hardy. Moderate drought tolerance, colored. Blooms spring-early summer. doesn’t tolerate frost or very moist soils. Grows in part FRUIT: Reddish 2”-5” sized, sweet-tart like flavor. Can be shade to full sun. messy on concrete. COMMENTS: Shrubby when young, multi-trunked when Bauhinia blakeana (Hong Kong Orchid Tree) Moderately older, dense foliage. Fruit made into jams, jellies, juices. drought tolerant FOLIAGE: Partially deciduous for a short period. Gray- Lagerstroemia indica (Crape Myrtle) Drought tolerant green twin lobed leaves. FOLIAGE: Deciduous. Deep glossy green leaves, fall color HEIGHT: Moderate growth to 20’. is yellow. Some trees turn orange or red. FLOWER: White 5”-6” long. Bloom appears in winter. HEIGHT: Slow growth to 10’-25’. COMMENTS: Grow in full sun. No significant pest FLOWER: Many colors: white, pink, red, purple, etc. problems. Blooms July - Sept. COMMENTS: Grow in full sun. Trees have a problem with Cassia leptophylla (Gold Medallion Tree) Drought mildew in the mild climate areas of County. tolerant FOLIAGE: Semi-evergreen, medium green, pinnately Magnolia grandiflora ‘Little Gem’ (Little Gem Magnolia) compound leaves.
  • Lincoln University Campus: a Guide to Some of the Shrubs Currently Growing There”

    Lincoln University Campus: a Guide to Some of the Shrubs Currently Growing There”

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Lincoln University Research Archive “Lincoln University campus: a guide to some of the shrubs currently growing there” Roy Edwards Department of Agricultural Science Lincoln University May 2009 The purpose of this book is to illustrate some of the range of shrubs currently grown on the Lincoln University campus. There are also a few trees that were not covered in the 1st book. This should be read in conjunction with its companion - “Lincoln University campus - a guide to some of the trees currently growing there” (April 2008). This also is a first draft and hopefully there will be further editions that will add species to address some of the obvious gaps. ISBN 978-0-86476-213-9 Cover image: Clianthus puniceus (kaka beak) “Lincoln University campus: a guide to some of the shrubs currently growing there” Roy Edwards May 2009 As with the first book “Lincoln University campus – a guide to some of the trees currently growing there” (April 2008) the purpose of this guide is primarily to increase the awareness for those people who are interested in plants of the Lincoln University campus. At this point in time the list is incomplete and it is my intention to hopefully add others at a later date. In this second book I have largely concentrated on shrubs and in some instances have included a few trees that were not covered in the first book. Documenting what is currently growing on the campus provides some sort of historical record and possibly the basis for some thoughts around future planting options.